Industrial Training Levy (Engineering Construction Industry Training Board) Order 2008

I thank noble Lords for taking part in this short but important debate and for the support for the orders that resonates around the Committee. We can all see the valuable work that the training levies allow. I have been asked a lot of specific questions. If I do not pick them all up, I will write to noble Lords in detail and read Hansard to ensure that we have covered all the questions. The noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, asked whether the employers levied are paying twice. It might be helpful to say that both boards are in discussion with the department about how they can benefit from Train to Gain. They will not have to pay twice. It is important to get that on the record. The noble Baroness rightly picked up not a change of tone but a very vigorous commitment to promote employer-led training through the experience of the Leitch review and Train to Gain. This applies to the next order as well. Being new to the department, I assure her that we highly value the work of the training boards and the levies. I will definitely have to write to her about £2.22 versus £2.11. That needs to be put right on the record. I shall try to deal with some of the questions that my noble friend has levied, if I can make that pun. He asked about the engineering industry, particularly apprenticeships in the aerospace industry. In the engineering construction industry there were 1,400-plus apprentices in training in 2006 and 200 completions. I shall have to get back to him on aerospace. In the construction industry there are around 30,000 apprenticeships in training. The largest groups are in bricklaying, carpentry and joinery, painting and decorating, bench joinery and solid plastering. My noble friend asked who assesses the Engineering Construction Industry Training Board. That is an important question. He has a way of putting his finger on the key issues. The boards are brought to account through their annual report to their industries, which is also laid before Parliament. The employers signify satisfaction by their agreement to support the levy proposals through the consultation process that has to go on. The Engineering Construction Industry Training Board is concerned with the erection, maintenance and dismantling of process plants, oil installations and power stations. It is not relevant to the aerospace industry. It has 60,000 people working in the sector and there are 1,400 apprentices in training. The noble Baroness, Lady Verma, asked a very important question about the Further Education and Training Act. The changes in that Act are not aimed at weakening the role of the federations of employers. They are intended to bring the Act in line with the employment landscape for the 21st century. Although employers are not necessarily signing up to the federations in the numbers that they did in the past, the federations will still have a central role, but it is important to allow the industrial training boards to operate a levy in the way that best suits the industry. They will have to use other ways of involving employers that are not in federations. The changes to the Industrial Training Act have been made at the request of the industrial training boards on behalf of the employers and their industries. We are very much working with employers, aiming to be employer-led and maintaining strong consultation and communication between employers.